BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

32 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 191clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna150Chennai110Karnataka105Nagpur94Mumbai78Delhi65Bangalore58Cochin38Jaipur33Kolkata32Rajkot20Visakhapatnam16Lucknow14Ahmedabad13Chandigarh13Hyderabad12Pune11Agra8Cuttack6Indore6Surat5Guwahati5Varanasi5Panaji4SC3Allahabad3Raipur2Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1Dehradun1Calcutta1Andhra Pradesh1Jodhpur1Amritsar1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 25022Addition to Income20Section 92C16Section 143(3)14Section 153A13Deduction13Condonation of Delay13Section 14812Section 263

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EMAS EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1162/KOL/2023[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2025AY 2005-2006

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 250

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. This appeal arises from order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter ‘the Act] by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)], vide order dated 09.01.2023. 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that

DHAR & COMPANY PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1113/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 143(2)10
Section 1479
Limitation/Time-bar9
ITAT Kolkata
17 Mar 2025
AY 2011-2012
Section 133(6)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69C

delay is for\ngenuine and bonafide reasons and the same is condoned.\n05. At the time of hearing, the Id. Counsel for the assessee pressed the\nground relating to merits which are against the confirmation of\naddition of ₹42,24,191/- by the Id. CIT (A) as made by the Id. AO on\naccount of bogus purchases

SAMIRUDDIN KHAN,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), , BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1169/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Bench raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of Ld. AO in passing the impugned assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 16.12.2019 is illegal, bad in law, inter alia

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 490/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80ISection 92C

condone the delay of two (2) days to filing the appeal. 3. At the outset, the revenue placed that both the appeals are in the same nature and have a common factual background. Accordingly, we have taken together, heard together and disposed of together. ITA No. 490/Kol/2019is taken as lead case. 4. The revenue has taken the following grounds

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 491/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80ISection 92C

condone the delay of two (2) days to filing the appeal. 3. At the outset, the revenue placed that both the appeals are in the same nature and have a common factual background. Accordingly, we have taken together, heard together and disposed of together. ITA No. 490/Kol/2019is taken as lead case. 4. The revenue has taken the following grounds

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VICTOR TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2310/KOL/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 68

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. Victor Tradelink Pvt. Ltd 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act on 12.11.2023 declaring total income at Rs.1,75,152/- and the same was duly processed

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 336/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 250Section 43B

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 333/KOL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 250Section 43B

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 334/KOL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 250Section 43B

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 335/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 250Section 43B

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(4), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

ITA 992/KOL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(1)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for A.Y. 2017-18 also for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: AY 2014-15: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order. 2. For that oh the facts

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

ITA 993/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(1)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for A.Y. 2017-18 also for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: AY 2014-15: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order. 2. For that oh the facts

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

ITA 994/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(1)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for A.Y. 2017-18 also for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: AY 2014-15: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order. 2. For that oh the facts

I.T.O WD - 8(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUIA SONS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 301Section 40

condone the delay and admit the appeal for regular hearing. 3. The brief facts arising in this case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for A.Y.2009-10 on 24.09.2009 declaring loss of Rs.30,97,3290/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 143(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee and as and when called

DCIT, CENTRAL -4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH AUTO MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2610/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 68

condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras.\nThe issue raised in ground no.1 is against the order of Id. CIT (A)\ndeleting the addition of ₹7,57,50,000/- as made by the Id. AO in\nrespect of unsecured loans by treating the same as unexplained cash\ncredit u/s 68 of the Act.\n3.1. The facts

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee as well as of the revenue are dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 736/KOL/2022[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O, M/S. Salarpuria Income-Tax, Circle- 1, Jajodia & Co., 3Rd Floor, 7, Vs. Kolkata. Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072. (Pan: Aagcs8492P) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner Of Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Ltd., 3(2), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.3/Kol/2023 In Ita No.736/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., Income-Tax, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

condoning the delay. The department has all the where-whittle to ensure that regulatory compliance and the relevant actions are taken within the prescribed limitation, with all sense of responsibility. The petition filed under the signature of DCIT, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata provides for general and vague explanations covering broader terms of period for explaining the delay. We note

M/S SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee as well as of the revenue are dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2502/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O, M/S. Salarpuria Income-Tax, Circle- 1, Jajodia & Co., 3Rd Floor, 7, Vs. Kolkata. Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072. (Pan: Aagcs8492P) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner Of Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Ltd., 3(2), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.3/Kol/2023 In Ita No.736/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., Income-Tax, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

condoning the delay. The department has all the where-whittle to ensure that regulatory compliance and the relevant actions are taken within the prescribed limitation, with all sense of responsibility. The petition filed under the signature of DCIT, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata provides for general and vague explanations covering broader terms of period for explaining the delay. We note

HILTON COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 676/KOL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Hilton Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward 5(3) 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Mercantile Building, Block-B, Chowringhee Square, Vs. 3Rd Floor, No.10, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacch1011P Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri S Datta, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri S Datta, CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263Section 68

condone the delay in filing the appeal. 03. The only issue raised in the various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of addition of ₹3,61,54,000/- by ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on account of share application / share premium, received during the year as unexplained cash credit

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 748/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Feb 2026AY 2015-2016
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)

delays in\nfiling both the appeal are hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of\nthe appeals on merits.\n3. ITA No.748/Kol/2025 – At the time of hearing, the ld. AR submits\nthat the captioned two appeals were wrongly filed arose from the same\norder of the ld. CIT(A) dated 09.08.2024 and he wants to withdraw one\nappeal

VEERPRABHU AUTO PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 2(4), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1218/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.:1218/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Veerprabhu Auto Pvt. Ltd. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining the action